|
|
|
|
- IPhone
- Android
- Blackberry
- Unsupported Device?
Visit: www.PakistanToday.com.pk on a mobile device
Friday, 24 May 2013 10:13 pm
High 14 oC - Low 7 oC
- Violence claims six more lives 8:38 PM
Aitzaz wrangles for more time as SC digs in
ISLAMABAD - Raising objections over the constitutional status of a seven-member special bench of the Supreme Court hearing contempt of court case against Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, prime minister’s counsel Aitzaz Ahsan on Tuesday requested the bench to refer the case to any other bench to save time, as it had no mandate to hear the matter under Article 10-A of the constitution.
The special bench of Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Muhammad Ather Saeed, however, did not pay any heed to Aitzaz’s request, asking him to conclude his arguments by Thursday. Aitzaz then told the bench that he could not promise to conclude his arguments by Thursday, as he had to advance his further arguments on Article 10-A. In his arguments, Aitzaz contended that under Article 10-A, which deals with the fundamental rights of the citizens, a bench that took suo motu notice and initiated contempt proceedings against the PM, was not eligible to hear the case. He repeatedly suggested the bench to refer the matter to any other bench to save time. He said Article 10-A had been incorporated in the constitution to ensure a fair trial. He said the courts had been referring various laws to parliament to remove flaws.
He said in case of the 18th constitutional amendment, the court had referred the amendment to the parliament to remove flaws and consequently the 19th constitutional amendment was introduced. He said after the passage of the 18th Amendment, the contempt of court ordinance had become contrary to the constitution. He said the court could order parliament to make the contempt of court ordinance in accordance with the provisions of Article 10-A. He said the court could refer this matter to parliament. He said since the instant bench issued show-cause notice in the contempt case, thus under Article 10-A, it was not competent to hear the case. He said under Article 10-A, the present bench could not try the PM for contempt. However, he said if the bench did so, it would be in conflict with the principles of a fair trial. Justice Osmany noted that the courts were empowered to take suo motu actions to get their verdicts implemented. Aitzaz then contended that such actions were taken on written complaints, applications and petitions. Justice Gulzar Ahmed asked Aitzaz what should a judge do if a person committed contempt of court during the hearing. Aitzaz said in such a situation, the judge should not show anger. Justice Khosa noted that in Islamic history, he never read an example of contempt of court. Aitzaz gave references of various cases of Supreme Courts of Pakistan‚ India and Britain to establish his contention that the fundamental rights were above enshrined by the constitution.
He said the fundamental and human rights have been given protection under the United Nations’ resolution. He said no law should conflict with the constitution while dealing with the fundamental rights of the citizens.
The bench asked Aitzaz to conclude his arguments as it had to hear the arguments of the prosecutor in the case as well. Aitzaz stated that he would present details and relevant references to the court and would not waste its time. Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing for today (Wednesday).
Talking to reporters later, Aitzaz said a section of a press was still writing imbalanced news stories about the proceedings of the apex court. He said there should be balanced reporting reflecting the view point of all the concerned parties.
He said Justice Asif Saeed Khosa rightly said that in the eyes of the law we were all equal from the president to an ordinary citizen.
He said the president enjoyed immunity in and abroad until he was in office.
He said the Supreme Court’s decisions would have to be implemented, however, it was not the right forum to hear the case.
15 Responses to Aitzaz wrangles for more time as SC digs in
Leave a comment
Print Article 
"dedicated to the legacy of the late Hameed Nizami"
Arif Nizami (Editor)
4-Shaarey Fatima Jinnah, Lahore
Ph: +92 42 36375963-5 Fax: 042-36298302
Ph: +92 51 2287273 Islamabad, Ph: +92 21 35381208-9 Karachi
Email: editorial@pakistantoday.com.pk
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten,
redistributed or derived from.
Unless otherwise stated,
all content is copyrighted © 2011 Nawa Media.
Technical feedback? webmaster@pakistantoday.com.pk
he is going to london….where is ill health then>
any way
senate seat khappay
It is totally wastage of money,time,energy and moreover country1s trusted Judiciary very nicely ruined.But when will be the end of this story as laws is blind and is effective only weakers not for wealthyand infuential personalities..There are more things to be done by the Respected Judiciary.But lingering on further is the success ful results of ppp backed by U.S.A.What that when the stories of poor will be heard?
How the high and mighty fall to pits of shame and notoriety, motivated by greed for more money not honor.
Your were considered a first class lawyer but now have turned into a liar.
Please stop posting his picture on a daily basis, anybody having his kind of smile will not be trusted by the people.
Barrister Atizaz Ahsan is using all the tactics available to him to get his client off the hook.
First he questioned the legitimacy of the court to hear the case Next he' calls in the 'Doctor" to report sick. Still he is a brave man to argue his case while sick. He will now be sick again and will need a break. I applaud his tactics but his credibility is thin. Publicity is good to an extent but then it backfires. As far as the poor er conerned they can only dream of justice—-their justice lies in the hands of local mullah who can be bought off by a daily supply of chicken tikka. well done Barrister Ahsan. Keep on delaying. Justice delayed is justice denied! People,s verdict is loud and clear!
how come Mullah in the matter.
Mr. Aitazaz is doing what he is supposed to do in the court i.e. defending his client and probably most of the people visiting these pages do not like his client very much; hence they have started to dislike Mr. Ahsan as well. Certainly, it was a very difficult decision for Mr. Aitazaz to accept Mr. PM as a client especially when he knew very well that what would be the response of right wing media, right wing judiciary and extremely impatient media consumers. It reminds me of Robert Frost's poem,
TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
So the reaction from media and others alike is not very much unexpected and honestly not very much unwarranted. However, Mr. Aitazaz surely deserves that an honest account of court proceedings must be reported in the media despite all their hatred for him and his client. After all he is only presenting his case in front of judges in the form of arguments and references; perfectly permissible. He is not having a gun pointed at judges in this case contrary to the one case in which hon'ble Justices decided to hang Bhutto under the shadow of Zia's gun.
Let us let him present his case for the defense of his client and believe me by letting him do this we will not be doing anything illegal, unconstitional and unlawful.
When there were disturbance and anarchy in Indian Punjab,This great man submitted the secrects papers to Indian Governmeent in BB`s perios in 1988,herhaps this is again on repeating the game.Otherwise if the Judiciary were strong and solid,no one dared to make accuses and baseless arguments.Allaha knows where we are going and what should be the end?
LIKE GURU LIKE CHELA..BOTH WILL MEET IGNOMINIOUS END NO MATTER JUDICIARY ISOFT WITH PRESIDENCY CONDUCTING POLITICAL,PARTISAN AGAINST OATH OF OFFICE AND CONSTITUTION.
It only goes to show how much respect or fear aitzaz has for the supreme court. He is playing them like a fiddle. When he says "jump", judges ask "how high?". Will the judiciary grow a back bone and make the tough decisions that need to be made for the betterment of the country?
PTI troll again again goes amock against aitezaz.
Bravo bravo Aitezaz
So… how much is Zardari giving you for being a PPP slave?
And more importantly, how much do you want to get lost to US or India? Its probably no more than Rs.50
Your comment shows – how narrow you are!!
… either tjis charlatan has forgotten his lawyering … or is just making a mockery of himself …